[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference napalm::commusic_v1

Title:* * Computer Music, MIDI, and Related Topics * *
Notice:Conference has been write-locked. Use new version.
Moderator:DYPSS1::SCHAFER
Created:Thu Feb 20 1986
Last Modified:Mon Aug 29 1994
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2852
Total number of notes:33157

1753.0. "Upgrading From IBM/Texture to Macintosh/?? Sequencer" by TRCA03::HITCHMOUGH () Tue Nov 01 1988 00:45

    Having been an IBM AT/MPU-401/Texture user for a while I am now
    in the position to get hold of a MAC II at a good price. The only
    problem is that my main use is in a home MIDI studio and I have
    no idea what it takes to bring the MAC up to a useable MIDI
    workstation. 
    I know that many of you out there use MACs so what I'd like to know
    is; what are your recommendations for the MAC II that will give
    me at least the same functionallity as I currently have (probably
    more seeing the MACs capabilities).
    Your suggestions  will be appreciated.
    Ken
    
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1753.1CANYON::MOELLERIs 'neotraditional' a word ?Tue Nov 01 1988 14:4212
    Hi Ken.. Karl here.  I use an ancient 512K Mac with 2 400K flops..
    My MIDI interface is from OPCODE.  It has a MIDI in and OUT, clock/
    poll speed switch selectable .5/1/2MHz.  It screws onto eithere
    the modem (my choice) or printer port.  I run Performer software
    from Mark of the Unicorn.  I read a Jan Hammer interview.. he's
    a big Texture fan, but is also using Macs, and he really beat up
    the Mac MIDI software folks for not using the 'chain a song together'
    model that he uses so much with Texture.  So you may not find the
    features you require in the software available on the Mac.
    
    Southworth and Opcode both make Mac MIDI interfaces.. dunno about
    the Mac II though.
1753.2FYIWRO8A::CORTOPADATue Nov 01 1988 14:568
    I just upgraded to a Mac+ w/800k drives.  Have Performer by Mark
    of the Unicorn, and still waiting for an Opcode 'Studio Plus 2'
    interface.
    
    The only bit of info I can offer is that I noticed in the Performer
    documentation that a few of the Performer functions don't work with
    a Mac II.  In my opinion, those missing functions are highly
    desireable.  dc
1753.3Still thinkingTRCA03::HITCHMOUGHWed Nov 02 1988 16:1515
    Thanks for the info. I think I may go with a simple Passport interface
    to start with. The sequencing s/w is another subject. I've narrowed
    it down to two choices (not scientifically) -Master tracks pro and
    Performer. I understand they've fixed the problems with Performer
    for the Mac II. The problem is that it's hard to decide without
    using it for a week and finding out whether it appeals to the
    appropriate side of your brain. I tend to be a music hacker that
    throws small ideas down and eventually gets around to expanding on
    one, so the Texture approach was good for me. However I can see
    how the Master tracks graphical editing would be really nice, but
    how do you know until you've tried it. With the price of s/w as
    it is up here (about 450 to 550 Can with tax) it could be an expensive
    mistake...any comments?
    Ken
    
1753.4Happy MTP userTALLIS::HERDEGMark Herdeg, LTN1-2/B17 226-6520Wed Nov 02 1988 16:3412
    I'm an occasional user of Master Tracks Pro on my Mac Plus. I have a
    simple 1-in 1-out Passport interface, which is fine since my only MIDI
    device is my Kurzweil K1000. I am happy with it. I like the graphical
    interface, but at some point I'd like to get some scoring software that
    it will work with.
    
    I paid about $210 (US) for Master Tracks Pro by mail order. There is
    also a Master Tracks Jr. with most of the features that sells for around
    $100.
    
    -Mark
1753.5YAHMTPU (yet another happy master tracks pro user)HPSRAD::NORCROSSWed Nov 02 1988 16:5027
> < Note 1753.3 by TRCA03::HITCHMOUGH >

>     I've narrowed
>     it down to two choices (not scientifically) -Master tracks pro and

Get Master Tracks  Pro.  I've been using it happily on a Mac SE for 1.25
     years now.   I  recently  did  a  side  by  side demo of it against
     Performer and all three of us agreed that if you're going to do any
     editing of songs, MTP is the better one.  The only real drawback we
     noted was that MTP doesn't record/send sysex data in real time with
     a sequence (it has a non-real time  sysex  librarian  though).  MTP
     version 3.0 goes for $300 (US) mail order.  MTP  version 3.0 offers
     32 MIDI channels.  For a more complete review see the  MTP  note in
     this conference (do a DIR/TITLE=MASTER).

>     I tend to be a music hacker that
>     throws small ideas down and eventually gets around to expanding on
>     one, so the Texture approach was good for me. However I can see
>     how the Master tracks graphical editing would be really nice, but

The graphical MTP  approach  is  a  superset  of  the  Texture approach.
     Basically, if you  have  several  parts  of a song that you want to
     arrange into a complete song,  you whip out the mouse and draw (cut
     and paste)  it  on  the screen.  You can also cut and paste between
     files.

/Mitch
1753.6Go 4 MTP.DYO780::SCHAFERBrad - back in Ohio.Wed Nov 02 1988 17:5810
    Although I own an Atari ST, I second the vote for MTP.  Great U/I.

    Only drawback (which may or may not be important to you - it wasn't to
    me) is the lack of on-creen notation and transcription capabilities.
    But Passport offers a package for the Mac that scores MTP files. 

    FWIW - Passport also has a new MIDI/sync box out for the Mac (or at
    least it's in the works). 

-b
1753.7MTP 4, Perf 1TRCA03::HITCHMOUGHFri Nov 04 1988 11:3210
    Seems like MTP has the edge based on your feedback. I dont need
    the scoring and I do like the U.I. that I've seen. I believe the
    problem with performer was something to do with the timing chip
    on the MAC II and this has been solved in version 3.0
    I've been able to convince my local music store to let me borrow
    both for evaluation so I'll be able to compare side by side in my
    own environment. Thanks for the help and I'll report back with the
    results.
    Ken
    
1753.8Decision made.TRCA03::HITCHMOUGHTue Nov 22 1988 11:3233
    Well, thanks to all those who gave advice. I tried Performer and
    was VERY impressed with the technicallity of the s/w. All those
    buttons that look like they're being depressed when you click on
    them are really usefull!! I just wish they'd spent as much time
    on the other little things that make the system a bit too cumbersome
    for my liking. The synch and editing capabilities seemed excellent,
    particularily if you're into film scoring which unfortunately I'm
    not. The documentation is very good, but I think you need it which
    to me is a downside. I also didnt like the very tiny fonts they
    used which along with the all the screen clutter made it very difficult
    for me to use when sat at my keyboard.
    	I decided on MTP based on the demo disk. Someone mentioned that
    if you're going to be doing a lot of editing then this is the one..I
    tend to agree, my compositions are 10% inspiration and 90% editing
    so the graphical interface makes that job a little easier. Its a
    pity you cant hear the note when you click on it in the track edit
    window, I still have problems translating Bb4 into something that
    relates to how I think the music should sound. 
    	I also settled on the Passport interface (the simple one) and
    paid $175 Can for it. I inherited a trait from my father that requires
    me to take apart everything I get and see what makes it tick, well
    opening the Passport interface caused me to puke when I saw what
    I'd paid good money for. Probably no more than $25 worth of parts
    in a cheap plastic box, admittedly they also supplied the necessary
    cables but... ;-(
    
    	Anyway, thanks for your advice.
    
    	Ken
     
    
    	
    
1753.9Good choice, Ken. You won't be disappointed.DYO780::SCHAFERBrad - back in Ohio.Tue Nov 22 1988 20:100